Yes and but that’s just how the distinction is made. Prime example: Shiba/Akita “Inu”. Inu is literally dog. Yet it refers to the purebred dog of Japan, not the american shitmix (no shade, theres just not much consistency with what they’re mixed with). Language evolves over time, even the dumb evolutions.
Yes and but that’s just how the distinction is made. Prime example: Shiba/Akita “Inu”. Inu is literally dog. Yet it refers to the purebred dog of Japan, not the american shitmix (no shade, theres just not much consistency with what they’re mixed with). Language evolves over time, even the dumb evolutions.
I don’t think they’re engaging in etymological reductionism.
Their argument is that instead of saying “milk only belongs in chai tea”, one could’ve just said “milk only belongs in chai”.